Posted 4 years ago on Dec. 31, 2012, 12:44 a.m. EST by Kavatz
(464)
from Edmonton, AB
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

It is the people who will determine what is irresponsible business behavior.

Popular opinion may one day dictate that corporations may not profit from banking, resource extraction, pharmaceuticals, genetic engineering, imprisonment, etc.

To start though, it could be as simple as “All singularly packaged products must clearly display production and expiry dates.” If any packager fails to meet this requirement, it is labelled an Irresponsible Entity.

What would it mean to a corporation for it to be labelled Irresponsible? With Watchdog and FreeInfo, the corporation would take a serious hit to its reputation. Consumers plugged into the conglomerate's web/mobile app would avoid you like the plague.

The 99% should be deciding what determines the success and survival of corporations. This system can regulate itself. I'm looking forward to the day when corporations unable to survive without government assistance are allowed to die, if it is the will of the people. One day the people will have the freedom and power to force certain industries out of private hands. There are some things that should not be capitalized on.

It is through the conglomerate website that members (consumers, employees and subsidiaries), define what irresponsible capitalism is. It will happen directly (members modify the rules) and indirectly (reviews, comments and conversations).

Great link, thanks! Beats searching for the best link. I have a lot to learn about direct democracy but so far I don't think it's a superior idea.

People should not be getting involved with policies they don't understand like an expert in the field does. If you allow this, then people will vote based on what they've been hearing in the media and with various perceptual errors.

That's one of the biggest problems with systems having two main competing parties, and a winner making decisions as representatives of all people. Who really knows what combinations of policies is best for you? The people at the top sure as shit don't care.

There is a better system for ensuring the best decisions are made. In this system, the nation's governance is divided into departmental silos... the Justice Department and the Environment Department primarily do not interfere with each other. Each has a leadership and constituency of its own. Well, here's the link (or I'll be reinventing the wheel again): http://occupywallst.org/forum/dgrc-manifestation-of-departmental-governance/

My point is that in this system, each involved/engaged citizen is focused on what is important to them and what they understand. They are more likely to personally know their leaders and everyone understands the issues affecting them.

People do not have to stretch and get spread thin on endless issues. I will care for my department the way others care for theirs, so I don't need to worry about the Economics Department if I don't want to... and I can be happy they aren't involved with the decision-making of my department(s).

There is much more than what is posted in this forum so far. There are details still to be posted including the following:

local to national governance structure and international representation

specifics about "special" departments like Justice and Economics with their cross-departmental functions

advantages in autonomous, self-sufficient silos of governance

significance to Responsible Capitalism, with the new political structure and separation from money

I'm convinced this system is superior, though I'm not well educated or up on worldly affairs. I'll look deeper into Direct Democracy as I've been meaning to for some time, and again, really appreciate the links.

One last thing, is that this all can be attained without resistance while fortifying and bolstering the occupy movement. It's the conglomerate, of course. It is a key for effortlessly returning power to people, distributing wealth to all, and to a new era of truer democracy.

That's why the conglomerate is necessary. It can be TPTB one day, having more influence on government than the irresponsible entities of our brutal capitalism. The conglomerate can systematically weaken, consume and replace them.